equality, excuse of jealousy

[Pekka]

Let me be more clear about the exam itself. It varies what it will be like, but you get to have the earlier year exams if you want to, and many times answers to them too. So, nwo you can figure out if there's a pattern or not. I found a pattern for example, and was able to capitalize on that. I had to do programming for the exam, so I only got some clue what kind of level programming it will be, not what the question will be, so I could better prepare myself. I could exercize with earlier year questions. Anyone could do this.

Then one question was logic. That's it, no other hints. You can't prepare for this so good. Sure you can read some logic questions books, but .. what ever.

And third question was.. surprise question, that is different every time, and it measures how fast you can comprehend a long text and answer questions where you need to use the information on the text and come up with results, based on that text and before you can do that, you have to understand what it really was. It's full of misguiding sentences and paragraphs, and little difficult to understand and you don't have all the time to read it.

If anyone got prep classes, ok.. but they don't give huge advantage! You can train yourself, and if you decide to concentrate on thinking how the other ones are now sitting in comfortable classes, hey you're on the wrong track and waisting energy instead of training.

Other areas.. law, mathematics, doctors.. what ever, there are no multiple questions. You have to know the area. YOu might have to write an essay. You can train writing essays yourself. It's not a grammar competition.

Yeah, they train taking tests, but so what? You can train on your own! And youh ave taken tests all your life before this, it's not like the first time and you don't know what to do.

So, it's purely up to you how you do 100%!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Pekka
Agathon, No I don't agree. They are private businesses that gives the extra prep. It's business. They have no obligation of teachging everyone. If gov feels like they should give everyone EXTRA prep, then sure. But until that, they shouldn't be banned. It's about the scores like I said.

But the scores only provide a worthwhile indication of ability if no candidates have an advantage which they've bought. If people are allowed to buy an advantage then the point of the test has been frustrated.

I support banning them or nationalizing them.

Who does best gets in, no matter how he got it if it was honest.

But you are treating this as a matter of fairness with regard to means rather than ends when it is the end that provides the rationale for the test. We don't just want who does best to get in, but who does best given a level playing field. If there is no level playing field then the test isn't doing its job properly.

What you are saying is that a test without a level playing field is somehow helping us to select the best candidates. This is manifestly false, since we can only tell who is the best when we have a level playing field.

[Pekka]

Agathon, The point in our exams are that you have to learn lots of stuff in short time. YOu have few months or less to read and learn some books. The questions will be about the area. Most of the time essays.

Hey, if you want some kind of different aptitude tests, fine, but it's not like here.

If you are interested on the area before you read the books and know something about it, then you should do good in it anyway. If you can handle the area better than others, then you deserve the place. If it's through work, or pure talent, I don't care.

Listen, if you want ot have aptitude tests purely and not handling vast areas of a new subject you need to read and work for, ok..

Aptitude and talent doesn't tell if you will be good in the subejct anyway. If you put your time in it and work hard and have some talent, you should get in. I believe in both, talent AND hard work. That's the key to success anyway.

I know smart people in school too, some of them don't work that much, and they get poor scores sometimes. Should I say, hey they are talented and that's ok? No, I rathed give my applauds to the slow kid who works his ass off and comes up with better results.

[Pekka]

So you get in if you are talented anyway, or with less talents if you work hard. I see no problems in this. I'd rather work with a guy who works hard and has good working morale and ethics, than with a dude who never does anything but is talented, with the same results both. Because the other shows effort.

The talented one should get EVEN MORE better results, because he is talented. But he doesn't work enough to get those better results.

[Pekka]

And remember that I'm not rich, vice versa I've always been broke as crap. Now more than ever, can barely make it last to get food. I'm dirt poor.
Never took those classes, AND failed the exam once and had to wait for a whole year to have another chance. I'm not requesting the Rocky theme to play here, I'm saying that I COULD go down to that lane and say hey there are privilidged people. I dont' say it because it's not true. It's up to the person how he succeeds in that test. There are situations in life where other people might be more privilidged and you never even had a real chance, but this is not one of those moments.

All my friends except one never went to classes and all got in. The one guy didn't get in despite two years in a row with classes. The thrid time he made it, without the classes. So I can say from experience, that it doesn't matter crap if you go to them or not. You have to work there too if you go. Talent or no talent, work or no work, scores is all that matters.

Or we could alwyas argue that hey the other kid had better breakfast that morning and wore more comfortable clothes because he had money, or that other one comes from broken home so he didn't have so good chances to get in. That's BS.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Pekka
Agathon, The point in our exams are that you have to learn lots of stuff in short time. YOu have few months or less to read and learn some books. The questions will be about the area. Most of the time essays.

Hey, if you want some kind of different aptitude tests, fine, but it's not like here.

If you are interested on the area before you read the books and know something about it, then you should do good in it anyway. If you can handle the area better than others, then you deserve the place. If it's through work, or pure talent, I don't care.

Listen, if you want ot have aptitude tests purely and not handling vast areas of a new subject you need to read and work for, ok..

Aptitude and talent doesn't tell if you will be good in the subejct anyway. If you put your time in it and work hard and have some talent, you should get in. I believe in both, talent AND hard work. That's the key to success anyway.

I know smart people in school too, some of them don't work that much, and they get poor scores sometimes. Should I say, hey they are talented and that's ok? No, I rathed give my applauds to the slow kid who works his ass off and comes up with better results.

What we are talking about are seminars where tests are dissected and prepared for. As GePap said, people who understand the way the tests work have an advantage over those who don't, but at the expense of making the test useless for its original purpose.

[Pekka]

No, if the questions are essay style, IMO.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Pekka
When you apply, you have some books you need to read. You know it in advance, and so does everyone else. You get the same exam. What the hell is unequal? Because some people go to some dudes classes and pays for it to get prepping?

That's because the prep schools are supposed to give those who enroll advantages in them exams. If not, what good are they, right?

Now, I don't know how those schools work in Finland, but I do know how they work here. There are several things they do, but the most important one is they have access to older exams, and know what questions are the most likely.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Pekka - how can you call someone lazy who wants to take this class to further themselves yet due to different circumstances cannot afford it?

[Pekka]

Jesus do you take me wrongly on purpose?

UR, yes, person can have advantages. But that doesn't make person a and person b unequal.

The Emepror Fabulous, because the moon is cheese.

[CerberusIV]

Q. What is the point of the university system?

A. To produce people with qualifications.


Q. How are they assessed at university?

A. By sitting examinations.


Q. So the universities, who want good pass rates, are best served by taking people who can demonstrate an ability to pass exams?

A. Yes.


Ability and talent have nothing to do with it if you can't apply, or learn to apply, them.

[Pekka]

Well it's getting little off the topic. The point is, everyone is equal in that room when it's time to rumble. Some might have advantages, but everyone is still equal.

Equality has nothing to do with this IMO.

[CerberusIV]

Pekka - I basically agree with you.

My point is that there is a system here and either you understand it and set out to beat it or you don't. Realising that you will benefit from paying for one of these courses is just part of that. The inequality is between those who understand what is going on and those who don't.

And there is no way of leveling that out - it applies to most things in life. Those who whine and want things handed to them on a plate when they can potentially overcome any disadvantage by effort and application deserve all they don't get.

[Ben Kenobi]

i took out one of these prep books form the free library (now there is equality):

Most perspicacious comment in this entire thread.

I used to buy all my books from the bookstore. Now I don't. I find them all from another source. Harder work, but I get to save 500$ or so per term.

Now, if there's a cost associated with something like these prep schools, figure out how you can get around paying for a similar benefit. Figure out what books they use, and see if you can't acquire the same books.

If you had told me that they had prep schools and the like in Finland, way back when you struggled through the exam for the first time, I would have told you to try this. But you didn't tell me so I couldn't help you.

[Pekka]

Ben, I don't believe in prep schools and never did. Plus I couldn't afford it anyway, and even if I did, I wouldn't have wasted me money on it. Prep schools are not 'the thing' to do. Vast majority never takes part in them.